Zen - classification

[hakey]

Not to say that cloud tagging seems to work well enough and to be used in many social software apps - Flickr and Freesound being obvious examples.

And the more I think about it the more I disagree that flexible cloud tagging is liable to be 'meaningless'. I think it's the opposite. Because anyone can append a tag to a patch, as tags are accumulated the tag cloud becomes more meaningful - there is a higher chance that a given key word search will yield useful results for the user who is searching.

OTOH a fixed classification system may not yield useful results if that user's preferred system does not agree with the fixed system.

For example different users may have different idea as to which category 'Harpsichord' belongs - is it Keys>Acoustic, Keys>Pianos>Acoustic, Plucked>Keys etc? Without an intimate understanding of the particular system used, finding the correct path to Harpsichords would be a laborious affair of trial and error

However, with cloud tagging a given Harpsichord patch would, over time, accumulate a wide selection of related tags that should allow it to be identified from a whole range of disparate search terms. And even right off the bat I would think that most Authors/Uploaders would be capable of adding sufficient tags so as to allow a patch to be identified by appropriate search terms.

[asseca]

PNO = Piano (ac/el/sy): Grand, Upright, HonkyTonk, Pianoforte, Harpsichord, Clavinet

You may consider harpsichords and clavinets a sub set of 'Piano', but I most certainly don't! In fact, I could go through your list and pick out many instances where your classification doesn't work *for me*. Not to say that it's 'wrong', rather we all have our own subjective view on how such a classification should be built.

And this is the reason why Tick is now moving towards a flexible, completely user-definable tagging system.

It is not how I percieve the "Piano" main-group, but how GM2 has been standardized, this is a system many "simpletons" like I are used to and understand. "Keys" to me is a very vague desciption, e.g. "Vibraphone" is not a "Keys" instrument ...

Regarding "cloud tagging", I personally think it is going to turn ZEN categorization into chaos, which is maybe a good thing for some users, and a bad thing for others, count me in the latter group ...

[hakey]

It is not how I percieve the "Piano" main-group, but how GM2 has been standardized, this is a system many "simpletons" like I are used to and understand. "Keys" to me is a very vague desciption, e.g. "Vibraphone" is not a "Keys" instrument

Which just goes to show how no one system would suit all. I would just refuse point blank to use a system that forced me to class harpsichord as a sub set of piano. (And why 'simpletons'? - I hope that you're not implying that my reply to your post was in any way condescending, because that certainly wasn't the intention.)

And the idea of a completely customizable user system is that you are entirely free to implement your own local classification. It shouldn't matter how everyone else chooses to organize their local system. I fail to see how cloud tagging and flexible user classification makes things chaotic for you or anyone? Just choose the way of doing things that suits you.

But maybe I'm missing something here? Can you give an example of how you would see cloud tagging hampering your usage and where fixed global tagging would make usage easier *for everyone*?

[Big Tick]

Yes but if tags are entirely user defined no system will gel with mine - in fact there will be no system and I might as well organise everything myself. I'm not arguing for completely rigid tags either - I just think we need a balance between the two.

(this reply to address asseca's concerns too)

Indeed, with the cloud system, if you look at all the tags defined for a given preset, it will be chaotic. But it's not intended to be used that way: in your instance of Zen, you will define the subset of tags that are meaningful to you, and where you want to see them. You will only have to do this one (and maybe not at all, if you are fine with the default subset selection and organization).

In other words:
- it will come with a default system (which is still open to discussion, but will probably be an extended version of the current one)
- users will be able to rearrange/ rename / redefine tags to define their own system, which will also be attached to the preset.
- if you define your own tags, you will still be synchronized with all users who have selected your tags as relevant for them

So yes, if your system is so unique that it only makes sense to you, you'll have to organize everything alone. If it makes sense to others and they use your tags, then you'll be leveraging the community tagging too.

[pummel]

A tag that has not been menioned is "range". What I mean by this is, where along the keyboard does this patch sound best / was intended to be used? Similar to the concept suprano, alto, tenor, bass.

Could you clarify you proposal for the relationship between user versus global tags? Are user tags to be in addition to global; or are they intended to be the renaming / regrouping of the global tag set (in the latter case, there will always be one-for-one mapping from global down to user).

Thanks.

[Big Tick]

Could you clarify you proposal for the relationship between user versus global tags?

The way I see it, the notion of global vs. user tag will disappear. Any user will be able to create tags visible by everyone. So anyone daring enough to create the "range" tags, and tag a gazillion presets, will be welcome to do so.

[crimsonwarlock]

The way I see it, the notion of global vs. user tag will disappear.

I think that also means we need an option to hide unwanted 'global' tags. And a list of 'hidden tags' in case we want to un-hide a tag.

[Big Tick]

The way it'll work:
- you will access the global, potentially large list of tag and hand-pick the ones that are relevant to you. Only these ones will be shown in the category/timbre lists (and actually, you will be able to define your own lists too)
- when selecting a preset, you will also see all the tags in the global list that are applied to the preset.

[crimsonwarlock]

- you will access the global, potentially large list of tag and hand-pick the ones that are relevant to you. Only these ones will be shown in the category/timbre lists (and actually, you will be able to define your own lists too)

Good solution, nothing to add or request to that for me

- when selecting a preset, you will also see all the tags in the global list that are applied to the preset.

Hmmmm... maybe not so good. If I understand this correctly, when I select a preset it shows tags that I didn't want to see in my list. For me the correct behavior would be to see only tags I select and nothing else, no matter what I select. The tags that I don't select are mostly tags that I think are not useful or simply do not fit the way I like to classify sounds. So also when selecting a preset, those tags are just cluttering up the experience.

EDIT: of course this last behavior is a prime candidate for a checkbox in 'settings'